The In Vitro Acute Skin Irritation of Chemicals: Optimisation of the EPISKIN Prediction Model within the Framework of the ECVAM Validation Process

In view of the increasing need to identify non-animal tests able to predict acute skin irritation of chemicals, the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) focused on the evaluation of appropriate in vitro models. In vitro tests should be capable of discriminating between irritant (I) chemicals (EU risk: R38) and non-irritant (NI) chemicals (EU risk: “no classification”). Since major in vivo skin irritation assays rely on visual scoring, it is still a challenge to correlate in vivo clinical signs with in vitro biochemical measurements. Being particularly suited to test raw materials or chemicals with a wide variety of physical properties, in vitro skin models resembling in vivo human skin were involved in prevalidation processes. Among many other factors, cytotoxicity is known to trigger irritation processes, and can therefore be a first common event for irritants. A refined protocol (protocol15min–18hours) for the EPISKIN model had been proposed for inclusion in the ECVAM formal validation study. A further improvement on this protocol, mainly based on a post-treatment incubation period of 42 hours (protocol15min–42hours), the optimised protocol, was applied to a set of 48 chemicals. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy with the MTT assay-based prediction model (PM) were 85%, 78.6% and 81.3% respectively, with a low rate of false negatives (12%). The improved performance of this optimised protocol was confirmed by a higher robustness (homogeneity of individual responses) and a better discrimination between the I and NI classes. To improve the MTT viability-based PM, the release of a membrane damage marker, adenylate kinase (AK), and of cytokines IL-1α and IL-8 were also investigated. Combining these endpoints, a simple two-tiered strategy (TTS) was developed, with the MTT assay as the first, sort-out, stage. This resulted in a clear increase in sensitivity to 95%, and a fall in the false-positive rate (to 4.3%), thus demonstrating its usefulness as a “decision-making” tool. The optimised protocol proved, both by its higher performances and by its robustness, to be a good candidate for the validation process, as well as a potential alternative method for assessing acute skin irritation.

[1]  B. De Wever,et al.  Analysis of interleukin-1alpha (IL-1alpha) and interleukin-8 (IL-8) expression and release in in vitro reconstructed human epidermis for the prediction of in vivo skin irritation and/or sensitization. , 2003, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[2]  Horst Spielmann,et al.  Currently available in vitro methods used in the regulatory toxicology. , 2002, Toxicology letters.

[3]  Valérie Zuang,et al.  Follow-up to the ECVAM Prevalidation Study on In Vitro Tests for Acute Skin Irritation , 2002, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[4]  C. Metz.  Basic principles of ROC analysis. , 1978, Seminars in nuclear medicine.

[5]  L. Turka,et al.  Keratinocytes: key immunocytes of the integument. , 1993, The American journal of pathology.

[6]  N. Fusenig,et al.  The Use of Human Keratinocytes and Human Skin Models for Predicting Skin Irritation , 1999, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[7]  R Roguet,et al.  A prevalidation study on in vitro tests for acute skin irritation. results and evaluation by the Management Team. , 2001, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[8]  M K Robinson,et al.  Comparison of in vitro and in vivo human skin responses to consumer products and ingredients with a range of irritancy potential. , 1999, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[9]  John H. Draize,et al.  METHODS FOR THE STUDY OF IRRITATION AND TOXICITY OF SUBSTANCES APPLIED TOPICALLY TO THE SKIN AND MUCOUS MEMBRANES , 1944 .

[10]  R. Roguet,et al.  The Use of Standardized Human Skin Models for Cutaneous Pharmacotoxicology Studies , 2002, Skin Pharmacology and Physiology.

[11]  J. J. van de Sandt,et al.  Alternative Methods for Skin Irritation Testing: The Current Status , 1998, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[12]  T. Mosmann.  Rapid colorimetric assay for cellular growth and survival: application to proliferation and cytotoxicity assays. , 1983, Journal of immunological methods.

[13]  V. Dixit,et al.  Keratinocytes as initiators of inflammation , 1991, The Lancet.

[14]  R. Roguet,et al.  Permeation and Skin Absorption: Reproducibility of Various Industrial Reconstructed Human Skin Models , 2002, Skin Pharmacology and Physiology.

[15]  A. Gröne.  Keratinocytes and cytokines. , 2002, Veterinary immunology and immunopathology.

[16]  David A Basketter,et al.  In vitro skin irritation: facts and future. State of the art review of mechanisms and models. , 2004, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[17]  M. Bracher,et al.  Reconstructed Skin Kits: Reproducibility of Cutaneous Irritancy Testing , 2002, Skin Pharmacology and Physiology.

[18]  D A Basketter,et al.  Evaluation of a human patch test for the identification and classification of skin irritation potential , 1996, Contact dermatitis.

[19]  D M Bagley,et al.  Skin irritation: Reference chemicals data bank. , 1996, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[20]  R Roguet,et al.  An interlaboratory study of the reproducibility and relevance of Episkin, a reconstructed human epidermis, in the assessment of cosmetics irritancy. , 1998, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[21]  Valérie Zuang,et al.  Alternative (non-animal) methods for chemicals testing: Current status and future prospects - Overview , 2002 .

[22]  R. Roguet.  Use of skin cell cultures for in vitro assessment of corrosion and cutaneous irritancy , 1999, Cell Biology and Toxicology.

[23]  M. C. Lenoir-Viale.  Reconstruction of human epidermis in vitro. , 1998, Methods in molecular biology.

[24]  Susan Gibbs,et al.  Characterization of Reconstructed Skin Models , 2002, Skin Pharmacology and Physiology.

[25]  J. Thivolet,et al.  In vitro and post-transplantation differentiation of human keratinocytes grown on the human type IV collagen film of a bilayered dermal substitute. , 1991, Experimental cell research.

[26]  C. Fokunang,et al.  The development of an in vitro screening strategy for topically applied products. , 2003, Journal of ethnopharmacology.

[27]  S. Chibout,et al.  Use of human skin equivalent Apligraf for in vitro assessment of cumulative skin irritation potential of topical products. , 2000, Toxicology and applied pharmacology.

[28]  M. Ponec,et al.  Use of human skin cell cultures for the estimation of potential skin irritants. , 1993, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[29]  E. Berardesca,et al.  Detection of Skin Irritation Potential of Cosmetics by Non-Invasive Measurements , 2000, Skin Pharmacology and Physiology.

[30]  B. De Wever,et al.  Predictivity of an in vitro model for acute and chronic skin irritation (SkinEthic) applied to the testing of topical vehicles , 1999, Cell Biology and Toxicology.

[31]  M. Ponec,et al.  Characterization and comparison of reconstructed skin models: morphological and immunohistochemical evaluation. , 2000, Acta dermato-venereologica.

[32]  C. Cohen,et al.  Refinement of the Episkin protocol for the assessment of acute skin irritation of chemicals: follow-up to the ECVAM prevalidation study. , 2002, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.